ZIP code
84604
in Provo, UtahPopulation 44,707
59.00/ 100
Ranked #5,593 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #75 of 284 Utah ZIPs (top 26%)
Ranked #18 of 27 Provo-Orem-Lehi, UT ZIPs (bottom 33%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Binge drinking
8.5%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
25.9%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Park land
69.7%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
22.2%
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
9.2%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
6.2%
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
3.8%
in the bottom 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
2.0%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
8.1%
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 84604, one of several in Provo, Utah places in the top 17% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,593rd) and the top 26% of Utah (75th).
The data opens on a genuinely even set of readings: modeled binge drinking settles in the bottom 0.3% nationally, and high cholesterol sits in the bottom 1.5% nationally. Park land lies in the top 1.2% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure rests in the bottom 1.7% nationally. Modeled diabetes resides in the bottom 1.7% nationally, coronary heart disease is in the bottom 2.7% nationally, and stroke lands in the bottom 2.3% nationally. Modeled mobility disability stands in the bottom 3.4% nationally. On the other side, modeled expected annual loss registers in the top 0.8% nationally, and slow internet speeds settles in the top 1.5% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 84003, just across the boundary.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Provo-Orem-Lehi, UT metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 71%
16%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.2%
11%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 93%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 95%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 45%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 34%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 17%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 95%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 19%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 14%
7%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 20.9; chronic-disease standing 97.5 (top 10%) — 77 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,949 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
84003
Utahshares a border
Score 65.33
Closest healthier
84049
Utahshares a border
Score 70.30
Similar health profile
84341
Utah99% similar profile
Score 56.40
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 16.0% | 14.7–17.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 22.2% | 20.4–24.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.9% | 5.5–6.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.3 |
| Depression among adults | 29.0% | 26.5–31.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–7.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 25.9% | 23.9–28.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.9% | 25.7–32.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.0% | 1.8–2.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.3% | 7.6–11.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.3% | 9.1–11.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 56.8% | 54.5–58.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 68.1% | 65.2–71.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 70.0% | 67.7–72.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.9% | 64.4–71.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.4% | 64.7–70.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.6% | 65.5–77.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 8.5% | 7.2–9.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–7.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.6% | 13.7–17.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.7% | 29.4–36.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.6% | 13.2–16.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.1% | 18.4–22.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.4% | 10.3–12.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.4% | 17.7–21.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.7% | 28.1–33.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.3–10.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.2–9.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.4–5.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.9% | 16.8–20.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.6% | 13.8–17.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.5–11.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.0% | 34.9–40.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 20.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 56.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.7%) n=281 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.7%) n=283 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 47.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 52.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 9.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 23.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | $75,571 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | $582,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | $1,178 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,321 ($834–$1,911) n=198 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured